OBJECTIVES: To validate the role of 3-T diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in the detection of local prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: T2-weighted imaging, DWI and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) were performed with a 3-T magnet in 262 patients after RP. Twenty out of 262 patients evaluated were excluded. MRI results were validated by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reduction after external beam radiotherapy in group A (126 patients, local recurrence size range 4-8 mm) and by transrectal ultrasound biopsy in group B (116 patients, local recurrence size range 9-15 mm). RESULTS: In group A combined T2-weighted and DCE-MRI (T2+DCE) shows 98 % sensitivity, 94 % specificity and 93 % accuracy in identifying local recurrence; combined T2-weighted and DWI with a b value of 3,000 s/mm(2) (T2+DW3) displays 97 % sensitivity, 95 % specificity and 92 % accuracy, while with a b value of 1,000 s/mm(2) (T2+DW1) affords 93 % sensitivity, 89 % specificity and 88 % accuracy. In group B T2+DCE shows 100 % sensitivity, 97 % specificity and 91 % accuracy in detecting local cancer recurrence; T2+DW3 displays 98 % sensitivity, 96 % specificity and 89 % accuracy; T2+DW1 has 94 % sensitivity, 92 % specificity and 86 % accuracy. CONCLUSION: DCE-MRI is the most reliable technique in detecting local prostate cancer recurrence after RP, though DWI can be proposed as a reliable alternative. KEY POINTS: • Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI-MRI) is being increasingly used in oncology. • PSA analysis does not distinguish prostate cancer recurrence from distant metastasis. • DWI-MR can diagnose local prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. • DWI-MR is almost comparable to DCE-MRI in detecting local recurrence.
OBJECTIVES: To validate the role of 3-T diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in the detection of local prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: T2-weighted imaging, DWI and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) were performed with a 3-T magnet in 262 patients after RP. Twenty out of 262 patients evaluated were excluded. MRI results were validated by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reduction after external beam radiotherapy in group A (126 patients, local recurrence size range 4-8 mm) and by transrectal ultrasound biopsy in group B (116 patients, local recurrence size range 9-15 mm). RESULTS: In group A combined T2-weighted and DCE-MRI (T2+DCE) shows 98 % sensitivity, 94 % specificity and 93 % accuracy in identifying local recurrence; combined T2-weighted and DWI with a b value of 3,000 s/mm(2) (T2+DW3) displays 97 % sensitivity, 95 % specificity and 92 % accuracy, while with a b value of 1,000 s/mm(2) (T2+DW1) affords 93 % sensitivity, 89 % specificity and 88 % accuracy. In group B T2+DCE shows 100 % sensitivity, 97 % specificity and 91 % accuracy in detecting local cancer recurrence; T2+DW3 displays 98 % sensitivity, 96 % specificity and 89 % accuracy; T2+DW1 has 94 % sensitivity, 92 % specificity and 86 % accuracy. CONCLUSION:DCE-MRI is the most reliable technique in detecting local prostate cancer recurrence after RP, though DWI can be proposed as a reliable alternative. KEY POINTS: • Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI-MRI) is being increasingly used in oncology. • PSA analysis does not distinguish prostate cancer recurrence from distant metastasis. • DWI-MR can diagnose local prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. • DWI-MR is almost comparable to DCE-MRI in detecting local recurrence.
Authors: A W Partin; J D Pearson; P K Landis; H B Carter; C R Pound; J Q Clemens; J I Epstein; P C Walsh Journal: Urology Date: 1994-05 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Daniel Buergy; Metin Sertdemir; Anja Weidner; Mohamed Shelan; Frank Lohr; Frederik Wenz; Stefan O Schoenberg; Ulrike I Attenberger Journal: In Vivo Date: 2018 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Martin T Freitag; Jan P Radtke; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Matthias C Roethke; Boris A Hadaschik; Martin Gleave; David Bonekamp; Klaus Kopka; Matthias Eder; Thorsten Heusser; Marc Kachelriess; Kathrin Wieczorek; Christos Sachpekidis; Paul Flechsig; Frederik Giesel; Markus Hohenfellner; Uwe Haberkorn; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; A Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-12-17 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: A J Conde-Moreno; G Herrando-Parreño; R Muelas-Soria; J Ferrer-Rebolleda; R Broseta-Torres; M P Cozar-Santiago; F García-Piñón; C Ferrer-Albiach Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Anunita Khasgiwala; Ankur M Doshi; Justin M Ream; Samir S Taneja; Herbert Lepor Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2017-01
Authors: Francesca V Mertan; Matthew D Greer; Sam Borofsky; Ismail M Kabakus; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey Journal: Top Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-06